Published 4:00 am, Saturday, June 24, 2006

A San Francisco judge has let the air out of the city's ambitious bicycle plan, forbidding the striping of new bike lanes and preventing Muni from allowing riders to take their two-wheelers aboard trains.

Superior Court Judge James Warren issued a preliminary injunction this week at the request of two groups, Coalition for Adequate Review and 99 Percent, which are seeking greater public review of the bicycle plan. The plan, approved last year by the Board of Supervisors and Mayor Gavin Newsom, is designed to make the streets of San Francisco more bicycle-friendly by creating more dedicated bike lanes and places to securely stow bikes.

The injunction will stay in place until the court decides whether the bike plan has undergone adequate environmental review. A hearing is scheduled for Sept. 13.

The groups' leaders say they are not anti-bicycle but in favor of due process. They sued the city in July 2005, arguing that San Francisco violated state environmental law by not properly assessing the plan's effects on the flow of automobile traffic and public transit, and on the availability of street parking.

President Trump addresses nation after mass shooting at Florida SchoolWhite House

The injunction bars the city -- at least temporarily -- from creating new bike lanes, changing the timing of traffic signals to accommodate cyclists, and restricting or removing on-street parking to benefit bikes.

The injunction means the city must place on hold its plans for new bike lines along the edge of Fisherman's Wharf on North Point Street from Van Ness Avenue to the Embarcadero. Other projects in the works could also be held up, including new bike lanes for Illinois Street, Potrero Avenue, Howard Street and Laguna Honda Boulevard.

In addition, the injunction prevents the Municipal Railway from moving forward with its long-planned pilot project to allow bicycles on the light-rail Metro system during off-peak hours.

The plaintiffs contend that the city rushed through the bicycle plan without adequately assessing the environmental effects. They said they were prompted to seek an injunction because the city continued to implement the bike plan despite their lawsuit. They cite an example from May, when the city eliminated street parking and a traffic lane for vehicles on Market Street between Van Ness Avenue and Octavia Boulevard.

"This is not about the content of the plan itself. This is about the process," said Rob Anderson, an activist who sued the city. "Just because we're progressives here in San Francisco doesn't mean we're above the law. They're eliminating parking and taking away lanes of traffic. What we want is a full (environmental impact report) so the public will know exactly how this plan affects them."

He said the city has opted to cater to a small group of bicyclists to the detriment of motorists.

The city contends that the state environmental review law does not apply to the bicycle plan. In court filings, city attorneys accused Anderson and the other plaintiffs of using state environmental law "as a ruse to challenge the fact that the city, through its Board of Supervisors, (has) made a policy choice to accommodate bicyclists as a viable alternative to driving in San Francisco."

Matt Dorsey, spokesman for City Attorney Dennis Herrera, said the city's legal team is "clearly disappointed with the injunction."

Warren did not rule on the merits of the case, which will be subject to the later hearing. But in the ruling issued Tuesday he said, "The court finds that the petitioners have shown a substantial likelihood of prevailing."

The lawsuit is just one part of the fight between motorists and bicyclists in San Francisco. Just recently, Newsom vetoed legislation approved by the Board of Supervisors and backed by bicycle advocates to close a small stretch of roads in Golden Gate Park to vehicle traffic on Saturdays.

"It's clear that the city is committed to the bike plan. Clearly there is political support. And polls have shown that the public supports it as well," she said. "The irony is that you have a few people trying to use the state's environmental regulations to discourage bicycling, the most environmentally friendly form of transportation."